2020-2021 NFL Thread

[draynay]

Two extra teams makes the playoffs, but two teams lose a bye, and they still want that damned 17th game, sounds like a lot of blahhh.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

They'll either get the 7th seed or the 17th game. I don't see the players giving up both unless their salaries go the way if the NBA.

[draynay]

I'd like to see increased roster size and slightly increased game day roster size, especially if they want that stupid extra game, rotating players in and out will be even more critical, and cutting rosters down will be harder with one less pre-season game.

[Vetali]

I'm pretty indifferent on this change. If 2 teams get a bye per playoffs then I just feel like it makes the first round byes even more strong. Don't mind them adding more teams to the playoffs. Expanding the reg season adds little value. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[eschatological]

Two extra teams makes the playoffs, but two teams lose a bye, and they still want that damned 17th game, sounds like a lot of blahhh.

I think it sounds okay. Makes for more relevant week 17/18 games, and it makes the #1 seed that much more important.

What I don't like is alternating years of 9 home games. Maybe if they introduced neutral site games for that 17th game, I'd be in.

[Vetali]

I'd like to see increased roster size and slightly increased game day roster size, especially if they want that stupid extra game, rotating players in and out will be even more critical, and cutting rosters down will be harder with one less pre-season game.

Get rid of inactives IMO. Shits dumb now days, especially when you have to have inactives for the playoffs/super bowl.

I don't mind them getting rid of game 4. Its pointless and rosters are pretty much set aside from maybe 3 spots. It may entice more joint practicing during TC though.

[draynay]

I think it sounds okay. Makes for more relevant week 17/18 games, and it makes the #1 seed that much more important.

What I don't like is alternating years of 9 home games. Maybe if they introduced neutral site games for that 17th game, I'd be in.

They'd have to triple the international games but the league would love that.

[kieraTM]

Go Birds!!!!!!!

[xskarma]

7 playoff teams per conference and only 1 bye = fine by me. Makes the playoffs more competitive and more fought over. I think it will lead to more interesting playoffs.

17 games in the season = HELL NAW.

There's so many things wrong with doing it. There's the injury problems. The player compensation problems. The unfair schedule problems where a team has to go on the road one more time than their division rivals. This WILL cost some team the playoffs at some point and will lead to grousing over unfair advantages.

And you want to know the worst part? The owners are only pushing for 17 games so they can say at the next CBA "Well we have to do something about the unfair advantage some teams have. We need to add an 18th game so every team is on even ground.

Cause THAT is what they want. They want 18 games, not 17, but they knew they wouldn't get 18 games, so they are trying (and seemingly succeeding in) getting 17 games instead.

It's just utter bullshit. If they wanted to spread the season out more, they could have given teams a second bye week. THAT actually helps. It spreads games out more without taxing the players more. But no, they want 17, sorry 18 games of football with paying customers and increase their bottom line. They do not give a single shit about player safety or wear and tear on players bodies or increased injury rates.

[Vetali]

If you are a player thats a FA right now do you even want to sign a deal with extended seasons looming? If I'm a team with a lot of money right now (cough seahawks) I'd be making aggressive offers to Clowney.

This FA period is gonna be interesting. Its either gonna be chaotic with big moves, or completely stagnant.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

I'm pretty indifferent on this change. If 2 teams get a bye per playoffs then I just feel like it makes the first round byes even more strong. Don't mind them adding more teams to the playoffs. Expanding the reg season adds little value. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Especially when there is nowhere to pull that extra one game from in their scheduling system. If it was two you just expand the same-seeding matchups to include cross-conference play. I think I've heard before that the "extra game" would end up just that the season is now 18 weeks and each team gets two byes.

Playoff expansion I think is going to happen, though making it so only the top seed gets a bye just means the odds of the #1 seeds making the Super Bowl g o from like 75% to 90%. If they want more exciting end-of-season action what they should do is remove the automatic home game for winning your division. So there's no more mediocre teams winning a mediocre division that feel content sitting starters because "we've locked up the 4 seed."

- - - Updated - - -

If you are a player thats a FA right now do you even want to sign a deal with extended seasons looming? If I'm a team with a lot of money right now (cough seahawks) I'd be making aggressive offers to Clowney.

This FA period is gonna be interesting. Its either gonna be chaotic with big moves, or completely stagnant.

Extended seasons, possible playoff expansion, and a new TV deal as well that'll be coming up.

Looking at what happened when the NBA got their new TV deal, I'd sign for as much guaranteed over as few years as possible.

[eschatological]

Get rid of inactives IMO. Shits dumb now days, especially when you have to have inactives for the playoffs/super bowl.

I don't mind them getting rid of game 4. Its pointless and rosters are pretty much set aside from maybe 3 spots. It may entice more joint practicing during TC though.

The proposal right now is 3 preseason games, 17 regular season games, so they'd indeed be getting rid of game 4.

- - - Updated - - -

They'd have to triple the international games but the league would love that.

Not necessarily. Like I said in our Slack, Bills "9th home games" could be played in Toronto, where we have a significant fanbase....Las Vegas, if it wanted to be cheeky, could play their 9th in Oakland.

There's lots of American cities who I think would probably love to host an NFL game. Who cheers for NO? Maybe a game in Mississippi or Alabama? Dallas could play in Oklahoma, etc.

[Pendulous]

Bryant-Denny would be a good place to host, it's bigger than most NFL stadiums. Huh, actually, it seems college stadiums are typically bigger in general.

[Northern Goblin]

Dropping game 4 for a 17th that has to be played on neutral ground is something I am all in favour of.

Not just because I get extra UK games that way.

[xskarma]

BREAKING NEWS:

The owners/NFL just accepted their own proposal for a new CBA.

Shocker, I know.

Now all on the NFLPA to either accept or deny it.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

Nflpa will deny it. The league deal would cap salaries for the 17th game at 250000. So if you make over 4.5 mil you take a pay cut for that last regular season game.

[Espo]

They'll either get the 7th seed or the 17th game. I don't see the players giving up both unless their salaries go the way if the NBA.

Which will never happen. I always love the social media outpouring from NFL players when NBA players get signed. They act like it's not fair and they're getting robbed by the league (which may be true, but not for the reasons they think). The player revenue share in the NFL and NBA are largely identical (47-48% vs 49-50%).

Not to derail too much, but one day, those NFL players will understand that getting NBA salaries means they need to play a lot more games (not just one), or need to find a way to play with far less than 53 players.

I guess the other options are A. they negotiate a ridiculous revenue share (nope) or B. put those college educations to good use and find a way to increase revenue. While it wouldn't increase contract value, finding a way to make themselves (NFL) more marketable would help as well. NBA players are so much more marketable than NFL players (for obvious reasons). But at the end of the day, the NFL's business model will likely never been as good for the players as the NBA's is. It's just a basic numbers game. NFL players picked the wrong sport if they want max $ and that will forever be the case (most likely).

I do hope the NFLPA focuses on what is potentially realistic, and that is better contract dynamics in the new CBA. E.g. better guarantees, better injury settlements, less lopsided structure in terms of the outs players and teams have, etc. If they can find a hybrid between their current structure and that of NBA/MLB players, I think that's a good win.

[Grube]

7 playoff teams per conference and only 1 bye = fine by me. Makes the playoffs more competitive and more fought over. I think it will lead to more interesting playoffs.

I think it does the opposite. Would Chiefs vs Steelers this year really have been a good thing to add to the playoffs? The Steelers were outscored 61-30 by the Bills, Jets and Ravens backups in the last 3 games.

[xskarma]

I think it does the opposite. Would Chiefs vs Steelers this year really have been a good thing to add to the playoffs? The Steelers were outscored 61-30 by the Bills, Jets and Ravens backups in the last 3 games.

Yeah, the playoffs themselves won't improve much with that 1 game per conference extra, but the fight over the no. 1 seed will be all the more intense. In that sense it will be more fought over.

Also, there are years when the 7th seed is better than Steelers were this year, and it's always fun to root for the upset in those kinds of matches regardless. Any given Sunday and all that.

Though, honestly, it might also just mean more chance for injury to key players on highly rated playoff teams. There's that too.

[Vetali]

Nflpa will deny it. The league deal would cap salaries for the 17th game at 250000. So if you make over 4.5 mil you take a pay cut for that last regular season game.

lmao no way that gets passed. The fuck does the NFL think its doing?